Switch is selling better than PS4, PS2, PS1, PS3, X360 launch aligned

[DonFerrari]

Mandalore76 said:

DonFerrari said:

So we moved the goalpost to he not saying if any of those systems are failure, but why others see it that way since you couldn't counter he saying that GC and WiiU aren't a case like PS3 that was considered a flop?

Not a crusade and not anti-Sony agenda, but that both posts were on the same direction of downplaying PS4 sales and rationalize PS3 flops with others not being. And you instead of saying what you think of that you try and change it on an attack one me questioning his motivations.

And also didn't see you saying if PS3 is a flop and N64, GC, Xbox, WiiU are failures?

 

The PS4 also received 2 official price cuts during that time.  The Switch is still selling at original launch price.

 

 

This is not being half wrong. Is being fully wrong. PS4 didn't had any price cut on the period show in the graph of OP. And to what you replied seems like you tried to downplay PS4 position by it having 2 price cuts. Do you deny it?

Multiple posters were commenting on how the Switch and PS4 will continue to trade spots every holiday.  All I did was point out that the PS4 had a price cut before its 2nd holiday, while the Switch has been selling at full price since launch.  I'm not downplaying PS4's sales.  It has sold ridiculously well this gen to the point of Sony themselves coming out and saying they don't know why its selling so well.  All I did was state a fact.  And, I've already apologized for stating that there were 2 price cuts in first 2 years, when it was 2 price cuts in 3 years (1 before end of 2nd year, the 2nd before the end of the 3rd year).  Mistakenly saying there were 2 price cuts when there was only 1 is being half wrong.  Last time I checked, 1 was still half of 2.  But, you seem to want to keep harping on something I already admitted to being mistaken on.

The point is "had 2 price cuts" on the context of OP hadn't happen any yet, so you would have to better time it on, they will trade position again because PS4 got a price cut after that period and Switch may not have one. Switch hadn't complete 2 years at the time of your post and PS4 didn't got not even the first price cut on the time show there.

curl-6 said:

DonFerrari said:

So will you say N64, GC, WiiU, Xbox are all flops? At what number of sales can we consider it a flop? Would 3DS also be a flop since it dropped to about half the sales of DS and that without even a strong competition?

Don't try to change the point. PS3 was made to lose that money to improve other divisions, it was a calculated move (you may claim it didn't work) not a result of failure. Let's say if Mercedes-Benz blow 15 Billion dollars in Formula 1 (just random number) while the prizes on the championship amounted to 10 Billion as a marketing stunt to promote their brand. Would you say that division flopped because it lost money or you would consider that they knew how much it would cost and how much it would earn directly, accept that particular venture would lose money and strategically decided for it anyway because of the benefits in other parts?

Unless you think Sony is dumb enough to think that selling a 800 console for 499 is lucrative by itself and not that they undercut the price of BD players at the time to push BD as a media format to win over HD-DVD in expectation that it would make they a lot of money on licensing and movie department, plus Cell would become standard for they to push on other electronics... Nope, they knew that would cost a lot of money for that department. If they had to prematurely discontinue PS3 as MS done with Xbox and Nintendo with WiiU and VirtualBoy then we would have evidence that the PS3 itself was a failed project not that the loses and movements were calculated and pushed from outside Playstation department.

Those platforms, like PS3, were all unsuccessful, yes.

"B-but other divisions"/"But they knew they would lose money" are ultimately moot points. A significant factor in Wii U failing as hard as it did was Nintendo  prioritizing the 3DS division above it, doesn't change the fact Wii U was a failure. At the end of the day, PS3 still lost billions. PS3 still gutted Sony's console marketshare. PS3 still lost the sales war. PS3 was therefore not a successful product.

Unsuccessful or flops?

Not moot points, if WiiU HW was made that way to support other ventures of Nintendo then it could be used as justification, but they focusing on 3DS (which also lost 50% of the sales, so a failure as well right?) wouldn't be an excuse. I didn't say Sony focused on Vaio, TV or any other department and thus dropped the ball on PS3, I said that because of other department strategy PS3 was used to push that even at financial cost on that individual department. We do know that it didn't pay on the other departments and that the strategy ended up not being good. But it wasn't by a mistake or overlook that they forgot how to make the sum of the cost of Cell and BD when putting the price. They said and knew from start that PS3 would cost about 800 and retail for 499 base and 599 with bigger HDD and they also know more or less how much SW they would sell on each HW, so they wouldn't recoup that money lost on the initial run on the SW sold. Sure if PS3 had sold more it would lose even more money, but could also drop the cost faster (we don't know the shift though), and perhaps if they hit 150M HW they could had proffited on PS3 (but looking at the money lost on 85M, versus the money made on the 100M PS1 and 160M PS2, even if they had reached 150M I think they would still had lost money).